Unified Communications Experts - All Comments/b/ucexperts/default.aspx7.x ProductionRE: Top Ten Reasons to Move to Exchange Server 2010 in 2010http://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2010/01/22/top-ten-reasons-to-move-to-exchange-server-2010-in-2010.aspxSat, 29 Jan 2011 21:06:21 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:dced287b-10c2-4b01-9a6d-eaee56b5cb3aAnonymous0
<p>It is great and comfortable using for all the people. I love your blog! You will be in our prayers and thoughts! Nice and informative post on this topic thanks for sharing with us. Thank you!</p>
<p>&lt;a href=&quot;<a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://www.777japan.com&quot;&gt;カジ&lt;/a&gt;">http://www.777japan.com&quot;&gt;カジ&lt;/a&gt;</a></p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3307583&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: Lync Server 2010 Pricing and Licensing announcedhttp://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2010/09/28/lync-server-2010-pricing-and-licensing-announced.aspxMon, 18 Oct 2010 17:30:53 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:886d90cb-7de9-4e01-bbcb-6bafb3a28712Anonymous0<p>Where can I get the grandfathering policy referred to above? </p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3358497&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: Microsoft and Polycom teams up for Unified Communicationshttp://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2010/09/01/microsoft-and-polycom-teams-up-for-unified-communications.aspxWed, 06 Oct 2010 20:17:45 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:d6f07c9b-ecb5-4d20-8bb8-8c8eee80eba1Anonymous0<p>Any news about using the CX5000, or a similar device, with Microsoft Lync?</p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3353150&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: What's new in OCS 14?http://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2010/09/09/what-s-new-in-ocs-14.aspxFri, 10 Sep 2010 05:23:33 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:538c3633-1103-442f-86cd-c09333084aa3Anonymous0<p>Thanks for sharing. &nbsp;This is great stuff. &nbsp;Are you able to give any word yet on when the public beta of OCS 14 will be available?</p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3354470&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: What's new in OCS 14?http://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2010/09/09/what-s-new-in-ocs-14.aspxFri, 10 Sep 2010 04:31:16 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:538c3633-1103-442f-86cd-c09333084aa3Anonymous0<p>Big functionality in previous version of Communicator was lack of history (at least without extra settings). Does new Communicator have history independent of other MS products (like Outlook or Exchange Srv.) ?</p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3354470&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: Unified Communications: Is it real and is it for me?http://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2010/07/27/unified-communications-is-it-real-and-is-it-for-me.aspxSat, 07 Aug 2010 01:35:32 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:45876894-c313-4a61-987b-ecaed04ed13dAnonymous0<p>Alex,</p>
<p>Very true. &nbsp;Also, I see too many people go down the path of deploying UC without fully thinking through what they want out of UC. &nbsp;Thanks for commenting.</p>
<p>Harold</p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3347088&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: Unified Communications: Is it real and is it for me?http://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2010/07/27/unified-communications-is-it-real-and-is-it-for-me.aspxWed, 28 Jul 2010 18:37:26 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:45876894-c313-4a61-987b-ecaed04ed13dAnonymous0<p>Really insightful and thoughtful piece this - i.e it&#39;s no good getting a UC solution if you haven&#39;t given a thought to the architecture...</p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3347088&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: Exchange Server Earning Leadership Everydayhttp://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2010/03/24/exchange-server-earning-leadership-everyday.aspxWed, 16 Jun 2010 14:22:56 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:6cafef2d-68bf-4373-ace2-12fd92899f19Anonymous0<p>Excellent article, but Microsoft also needs to focus on the security aspect of the services, in which Linux is having better security....</p>
<p>All the large enterprise organizations and ISP&#39;s will only move to Microsoft platform when Leadership will also build-in the own proprietary security algorithm</p>
<p>Vivek</p>
<p>du</p>
<p>UAE</p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3321035&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: Voice Mail Preview FAQ (Part 1)http://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2010/01/20/voice-mail-preview-faq-part-1.aspxTue, 08 Jun 2010 16:27:55 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:cc4827bc-b3f8-4fa6-99b0-d3406368bf41Anonymous0<p>When is the VoiceMail preview be also available in Dutch ?</p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3307209&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: Exchange 2010: Saving Money, Delighting Users, Protecting Communicationshttp://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2009/11/09/exchange-2010-saving-money-delighting-users-protecting-communications.aspxTue, 27 Apr 2010 21:16:47 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:1f471672-71a1-4371-b07f-c6ca1747e290Anonymous0<p>This shoulb be the best for IT. I will try it very soon in future.</p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3291787&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: Exchange Server Earning Leadership Everydayhttp://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2010/03/24/exchange-server-earning-leadership-everyday.aspxTue, 27 Apr 2010 03:24:49 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:6cafef2d-68bf-4373-ace2-12fd92899f19Anonymous0<p>love the article! many good points</p>
<p>``That is just a snap shot of the history of Exchange; there is obviously much more to this story``</p>
<p>so true!</p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3321035&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: Exchange Server Earning Leadership Everydayhttp://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2010/03/24/exchange-server-earning-leadership-everyday.aspxTue, 27 Apr 2010 03:23:06 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:6cafef2d-68bf-4373-ace2-12fd92899f19Anonymous0<p>love the article! many good points.</p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3321035&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: Exchange UM: Protecting your mobile numberhttp://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2010/02/11/exchange-um-protecting-your-mobile-number.aspxThu, 18 Feb 2010 03:48:41 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:e3adeb6e-5d97-43fd-bf3c-be4041e63e31Michael Wilson0<p>Markus,</p>
<p>Thank you for the suggestion. UM in Exchange 2010 does not provide an administrator interface to the definition of the users' Call Answering Rules.</p>
<p>UM *does* allow administrators to block users from creating Call Answering Rules, or to limit the phone numbers to which those users and their rules can place outbound calls.</p>
<p>The reason that we did not provide admin access to Call Answering Rules was to allow users' personal phone numbers (which they might enter into Call Answering Rules) to remain private, if they wish.</p>
<p>I agree that there are circumstances (such as the OOF scenario you descibe) in which it could be useful for an administrator to create a Call Answering Rule on behalf of a user. We'll certainly consider this for a later release.</p>
<p> &nbsp;-- Michael</p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3312358&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: Exchange UM: Protecting your mobile numberhttp://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2010/02/11/exchange-um-protecting-your-mobile-number.aspxThu, 18 Feb 2010 00:16:23 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:e3adeb6e-5d97-43fd-bf3c-be4041e63e31Anonymous0<p>Dear Michael!</p>
<p>Thank you for this posting!</p>
<p>Is there a possibility, to provide call answering rules from an admin to users?</p>
<p>for example: let`s say the company wants to disable the ability to leave voice-messages to employees during them being out of office. Is it possible to provision a call answering rule to the users, which disables the ability to leave voice messages while their out of office assistant is activated?</p>
<p>I can do this scenario for myself, when defining call answering rules in OWA, however I didn`t find this possibility from an admin point of view.</p>
<p>Thank you very much for your comment in advance!</p>
<p>Best regards</p>
<p>Markus</p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3312358&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: Exchange 2010: Saving Money, Delighting Users, Protecting Communicationshttp://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2009/11/09/exchange-2010-saving-money-delighting-users-protecting-communications.aspxSat, 09 Jan 2010 09:07:08 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:1f471672-71a1-4371-b07f-c6ca1747e290Anonymous0<p>thanks for your insights, Julia! what else is there to say since you said &quot;IT organizations like yours are under cost pressure like never before&quot; ;) </p>
<p>Good Luck, Alex </p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3291787&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: Maximizing Efficiencies with Unified Communicationshttp://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2009/10/09/maximizing-efficiencies-with-unified-communications.aspxFri, 08 Jan 2010 06:30:56 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:939314b2-4e20-4eb9-93c6-18323bd890e3Harold Wong0<p>David: I would recommend putting together a quick little training session (recorded) and get that out. &nbsp;Focus on some of the key vocal users who will choose to promote to fellow workers just because they love the features themselves.</p>
<p>Derek: I can see the challenge when comparing to Exchange 2007 LCR, but to me the DAG solution (Mailbox Resiliency) in 2010 is MUCH more affordable than SCC and SCR. In order to use SCC or SCR, you would need to Enterprise Licenses of Exchange Server 2007 as well as a second physical server. &nbsp;For SCC, you would need shared storage as well. &nbsp;With Exchange 2010, you could use two Standard Licenses of Exchange Server 2010 to implement Mailbox Resiliency, plus take advantage of SATA drives versus SCSI. &nbsp;At the same time, I would not put LCR into the same category as SCR or Mailbox Resiliency in 2010.</p>
<p>Harold </p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3285903&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: Maximizing Efficiencies with Unified Communicationshttp://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2009/10/09/maximizing-efficiencies-with-unified-communications.aspxWed, 23 Dec 2009 21:30:03 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:939314b2-4e20-4eb9-93c6-18323bd890e3Anonymous0<p>I'd like to dispute that DAG is &quot;affordable.&quot; It's hardly affordable for a small company using Exchange 2007's LCR or SCC. Purchasing another $4,000 server, another Exchange license (if not covered under EA/SA), etc. It's increasingly apparent that Microsoft is no longer interested in service SMBs.</p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3285903&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">RE: Maximizing Efficiencies with Unified Communicationshttp://blogs.technet.com/b/ucexperts/archive/2009/10/09/maximizing-efficiencies-with-unified-communications.aspxWed, 23 Dec 2009 12:12:51 GMTd5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:939314b2-4e20-4eb9-93c6-18323bd890e3Anonymous0<p>i like the self service concept. Any tips on how to get user buy in?</p>
<img src="http://blogs.technet.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=3285903&AppID=7810&AppType=Weblog&ContentType=0" width="1" height="1">